Summary: Mr B complains about the Council’s handling of matters relating to a councillor code of conduct complaint. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it dealt with the matter.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr B, complains about the Council’s handling of a councillor code of conduct complaint. He wants the report the Council has issued in relation to the complaint to be reissued with one particular statement which he disagrees with removed from it.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Mr B and the Council. I gave Mr B the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what he said.

Back to top

What I found

4. The Council dealt with a complaint about the behaviour of named councillors in line with its Councillor Code of Conduct procedures. Given the nature of the case, an independent investigator was appointed to review the concerns raised.
5. The independent investigator produced a report which was reviewed by the Independent Person (IP), in line with the requirements of the Localism Act. A decision notice was produced and sent to the councillors the subject of the complaint and to the person who had made the complaint.
6. Mr B complained to the Council about a particular statement in the report, stating it was unsupported by evidence and should be removed.
7. The Council considered his complaint about this matter. However, it explained the statement in question was included on the decision notice under the section allocated for the IP’s views and was a direct quote from the IP. It said that while Mr B might not agree with what the IP had said, this was the IP’s view which they were entitled to express.

Assessment

8. While I understand Mr B may disagree with the view expressed by the IP, I have seen no evidence to suggest there was fault in the way this matter was dealt with by the Council.
9. An investigation was carried out and, as required by the relevant legislation, the Council consulted the IP and took their views, which are a material consideration, into account. The views expressed were properly recorded and I see no grounds which warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council in the way it dealt with the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman